THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT: AN OLDFASHIONED, WILD WEST, FIRST AMENDMENT SHOOTOUT I. II.
INTRODUCTION ........................................... 676 . . . .. . . .. . . . WHAT IS THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT? .. . . .. . . 678
A. B. C.
III.
IV. V.
Purpose of TOMA ....................... ....... 678 Safe HarborProvisions and Defenses ................ 682 Issues............. ................... ...... 682 FIRST AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE .................... ..... 684 A. Content-BasedRestrictions........... ............... 684 B. UnprotectedSpeech Exception ................ ..... 685 C. Neutral Time, Place, and Manner Regulations..... ..... 686 D. The Secondary Effects Doctrine... ......................... 686 E. Underinclusiveness: Viewpoint and Subject Matter Discrimination .......................................... 687 F. Overinclusiveness: The OverbreadthDoctrine.......................687 G. DisclosureLaws .......................... ..... 688 H. The Vagueness Doctrine .................... ..... 688 DOES THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECT THE SPEECH OF . . ..... ... ....... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ELECTED OFFICIALS? 689 TOMA AS THE FIRST AMENDMENT OUTLAW IN ASGEIRSSON V.
ABBOT
A. B. VI.
................................................... 692 BackgroundandHistory ................................ 693 The FederalDistrict Court and Fifth CircuitHoldings.......... 694
WANTED FOR VIOLATIONS OF TOMA: ILLUSTRATIVE CASE
LAW ........................................... A. The Walking Quorum .........................
........ 698 .....
698
B. C.
The Rubber Stamp Committee ............................699 Secret Expenditures ............................. 699 VII. EXAMPLES AND THE PORT OF HOUSTON FIGHT .... ............ 700 A. Examples .................................... 700 1. Joint Statements, Letters to the Editor, and Press Conferences ....................... ........... 700 2. Polling ......................... ..... ...... 701 3. CreatingSupportfor Laws.............................. 701 4. Building Opposition Against Laws........ .......... 703 B. Real Life Scenario: The Port ofHouston Fight...................... 703 VIII. WHY TOMA REQUIRES ITS OWN CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ............................................. 706 A. Rebutting the Fifth Circuit'sHolding ........... ...... 707 B. New ConstitutionalFrameworkand Legislative Solutions..... 708 1. The Legislative Test................. ......... 700 2. The Direct Nexus Test............ ............... 710 3. Legislative Solutions .......................... 710 IX.
CONCLUSION
.............................................
710
675